Any way to switch T720 cell phone from Cingular to Verizon

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:13:59 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >The non-AT&T
> >affiliated, smaller carriers, tended to go to CDMA when they added
digital
> >to their AMPS network. They did this for cost reasons since less towers
are
> >needed to cover the same geograhic area with CDMA than GSM or TDMA,
>
> Where did you get that piece of bull****? The technology doesn't have
> **** to do with using less or more towers. The frequency used does.
> Cellular does not require as many towers as PCS (1900.) The
> technology doesn't.

Watch your language--especially when you don't know what you're talking
about. The air interface has everything to do with how many towers are
required. GSM has a maximum range of 35 km, even if the signal strength is
adequate, timing considerations prevent longer distances. CDMA can have a
range of 110km. This is why countries like Australia went to CDMA in the
rural areas, you need far fewer towers. These ranges are possible with tall
towers and non-mountainous terrain.

In the U.S., there are areas that will either remain as AMPS, or go to CDMA,
GSM is not an option. The GSM carriers are creating corridors of coverage
along major highways through rural areas.

In urban areas there is no advantage to CDMA in terms of the number of
towers to cover an area, only the capacity advantages that CDMA offers.

---

› See More: Any way to switch T720 cell phone from Cingular to Verizon

In article <[email protected]>,
Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:13:59 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >The non-AT&T
>> >affiliated, smaller carriers, tended to go to CDMA when they added
>digital
>> >to their AMPS network. They did this for cost reasons since less towers
>are
>> >needed to cover the same geograhic area with CDMA than GSM or TDMA,
>>
>> Where did you get that piece of bull****? The technology doesn't have
>> **** to do with using less or more towers. The frequency used does.
>> Cellular does not require as many towers as PCS (1900.) The
>> technology doesn't.
>
>Watch your language--especially when you don't know what you're talking
>about. The air interface has everything to do with how many towers are
>required. GSM has a maximum range of 35 km, even if the signal strength is
>adequate, timing considerations prevent longer distances. CDMA can have a
>range of 110km. This is why countries like Australia went to CDMA in the
>rural areas, you need far fewer towers. These ranges are possible with tall
>towers and non-mountainous terrain.

In Australia, they tweak a CDMA parameter on the cell sites to allow the
handset to be even further away than "standard" CDMA. Nice thing is,
the handsets do not require any firmware changes; the cell site just
tolerates more timing skew in the signal from the handset.

"CharlesH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> In Australia, they tweak a CDMA parameter on the cell sites to allow the
> handset to be even further away than "standard" CDMA. Nice thing is,
> the handsets do not require any firmware changes; the cell site just
> tolerates more timing skew in the signal from the handset.

This sounds like a good solution for an AMPS replacement in the U.S. as
well.